- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
- Messages
- 26,344
- Reaction score
- 23,164
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
“
Trump stimulated the economy, Reagan stimulated the economy, all by allowing people to keep more of what they earn. You seem to have a problem with that. Do you send and are you sending your Trump tax cuts back?”
I voted for Reagan (both times) and I was willing to give “trickle down” a try. Four years on, tax laws had been radically revised to skew benefits to the rich and to large corporations and banks, thus accelerating the cycle having the middle class pay a larger share of the nation’s debts. Four years on, there was little sign of progress. Interest rates remained stubbornly high, and the only way the Reagan administration could show any significant change in employment was to change the way they were counted.
In 1985, the Saudis stopped cutting production to shore up the posted OPEC price. Oil prices collapsed. And Reagan got bailed out. Simultaneously Russia, which was (and is) heavily dependant on the foreign currency earnings on oil sales found itself on the verge of economic collapse.
“wow, quite a re-write of history, did you support the shutdown to stop the spread of the virus or to generate negative economic results to blame on Trump?”
Would you like me to list them all for you????? You can’t claim a “rewrite” of events that actually did happen. Only once did the GOP actually shut the government down during the Obama years. But they repeatedly threatened to do, only relenting after cliffhanger negotiations.
Trump managed to bellow himself into a shutdown of his own making!
“Tax cuts aren't financed as they aren't an expense. you ever going to tell us what taxes you pay and their purpose? Do you know what the discretionary and mandatory items in the budget and what taxes fund them?”
I guess they appear out of thin air! When taxes are cut, and spending is not, tax cuts are an expense.
“
I got it from my parents who taught me personal responsibility which I passed on to my kids.”
Putting aside the sloganeering you do on this, it has nothing to do with your idiotic claim that Americans are so rich that they can choose (almost no one does) with regard to health care and insurance. You ignored every point in my response and retreated very quickly to your stock rant about “personal responsibility”. Which is what you do when you say something obviously ridiculous and you don’t have the stones to admit it, prompting the predictable empty rhetoric substitute for a substantive response.
”And why is that? what is it that drives up costs? Why don't you ever post the line items that drive up costs of U.S. healthcare like R&D costs for Drugs, Federal Regulations, legal expenses?”
History. In the United States, four health insurance companies function as the bank for the health care system. There is no incentive to reduce costs, improve effenciency, or to even provide adequate services (as people in rural areas are learning as big hospital chains buy and close small regional hospitals in order to control markets and drive up prices). These companies have far more resources and political clout than any insurance commission in any state. In fact, routine threats by insurance companies to leave individual states are a routine threat the industry uses to keep state regulators in line.
In the US we have a system where people depend on their employers to buy their health insurance. And because there is very little incentive to reduce costs, the cost goes up higher than the inflation rate. So employers pass more and more of the increases on to employees in the form of employee payments, higher decuctables and copays.
You’re on single payer national health care. You’re living in the world that you’re here opposing.
Oh, and the system you’re not really defending at all is the most expensive, risky for patients, in the world.
